This paper draws upon a recently completed research study of the responses of accountants and HR professionals to actual issues at work that had posed them ethical qualms. The study sought to get beyond ethical reasoning about hypothetical scenarios and to address issues of actual behaviour, focusing upon the interviewees explanations of these behaviours. In general terms there was an observable difference between the attitudes and behaviours of accountants and HR professions, but not in the simple, stereotypical sense. The concerns (...) expressed by the interviewees when calculating their chosen courses of action in a given situation, reflected grave concerns for their current and future employment prospects, if they were to raise their concerns, either within their employing organisation, or beyond. The problems of whistleblowers are well documented, but at a time when corporate governance issues occupy the attention of financial markets and corporate boards around the world, and national governments are introducing new laws to ostensibly provide enhanced protection for whistleblowers, the evidence of this study is that moral agency remains at best an aspiration, and at worst a chimera. (shrink)

This paper draws upon a research study of accountants and HR specialists. The study eschewed hypothetical scenarios and focused upon those situations and scenarios that the interviewees defined as causing them ethical concerns. There are two distinct but related issues arising from the paper. The first is that the singular categorisations of moral reasoning attributed to individuals when faced with hypothetical scenarios by many who write on the issue of moral reasoning, did not correspond to the fluidity in moral choices (...) faced by the interviewees as they experienced their unfolding moral dilemmas. The second issue relates to the unwillingness of the interviewees to give voice to their concerns, not only externally, but also within their employing organisations. The tensions within the two cases featured were held in check only by the diminution of the autonomy of the two principal actors. As a consequence, the exercise of moral agency was denied. (shrink)

This paper draws upon a research study of accountants and HR specialists. The study eschewed hypothetical scenarios and focused upon those situations and scenarios that the interviewees defined as causing them ethical concerns. There are two distinct but related issues arising from the paper. The first is that the singular categorisations of moral reasoning attributed to individuals when faced with hypothetical scenarios by many who write on the issue of moral reasoning, did not correspond to the fluidity in moral choices (...) faced by the interviewees as they experienced their unfolding moral dilemmas. The second issue relates to the unwillingness of the interviewees to give voice to their concerns, not only externally, but also within their employing organisations. The tensions within the two cases featured were held in check only by the diminution of the autonomy of the two principal actors. As a consequence, the exercise of moral agency was denied. (shrink)